PDA

View Full Version : tPF Question for The Hi-Hard Life Long Conservatives



Cigar
01-31-2016, 09:14 PM
Do you believe the Republican Party, such as has been, can take back their Party from Trump and or Cruz?

Or do you believe Trump and or Cruz is the Future of the Party an this is the way it should evolve?

JVV
01-31-2016, 09:29 PM
That's a funny question, since it was the conservatives who took the party away from the moderate progressives who founded the party and ran it for 100 years.

Conservatives are johnny-come-latelies to the GOP.

hanger4
01-31-2016, 09:30 PM
Don't know what needs to be taken back. Neither one is the face of the party yet.

Same question can be asked of die-hard progressives. Are Sanders or Clinton going to be the face of the party ?? Is that a good thing ??

Cigar
01-31-2016, 09:32 PM
That's a funny question, since it was the conservatives who took the party away from the moderate progressives who founded the party and ran it for 100 years.

Conservatives are johnny-come-latelies to the GOP.

I was at an Beer Tasting Event yesterday and had a conversation with a bunch of Republicans and they want just about anyone but Trump and Cruz.

Straight from the Taphttp://arrowheadgolfclub.org/beer/

Cigar
01-31-2016, 09:35 PM
Don't know what needs to be taken back. Neither one is the face of the party yet.

Same question can be asked of die-hard progressives. Are Sanders or Clinton going to be the face of the party ?? Is that a good thing ??

Actually Yes ... Sanders is forcing Clinton is the right direction, more Progressive.

I don't agree with everything Sanders or Clinton wants, but then I never agree with everything any President wants, because I actually believe in compromise.

But THIS THREAD is about The Republican Party, NOT The Democratic Party.

You're free to start a Thread asking that question to Liberals

Matty
01-31-2016, 09:41 PM
I don't know but Ferguson was a sham. The dead guy was the criminal not the cop.

JVV
01-31-2016, 09:47 PM
I was a lifelong Republican. Until like last month. Finally gave up on 'em. The so-called "conservatives" did me in. They took the party away from the Eisenhower progressives and now they're the party of entropy and hate.

So the question isn't for me. I've abandoned the Republicans to their own tortuous devices. But I just had to pop in and say it's a funny notion for the conservatives to be taking the party back from anyone since they haven't had it themselves for very long.

hanger4
01-31-2016, 09:53 PM
Actually Yes ... Sanders is forcing Clinton is the right direction, more Progressive.

I don't agree with everything Sanders or Clinton wants, but then I never agree with everything any President wants, because I actually believe in compromise.

But THIS THREAD is about The Republican Party, NOT The Democratic Party.

You're free to start a Thread asking that question to Liberals

Again, thete's nothing to take back, neither one is the face of the party yet. Your question is premature.

Matty
01-31-2016, 09:53 PM
I was a lifelong Republican. Until like last month. Finally gave up on 'em. The so-called "conservatives" did me in. They took the party away from the Eisenhower progressives and now they're the party of entropy and hate.

So the question isn't for me. I've abandoned the Republicans to their own tortuous devices. But I just had to pop in and say it's a funny notion for the conservatives to be taking the party back from anyone since they haven't had it themselves for very long.


So you joined the haters called democrats?

Cigar
01-31-2016, 10:00 PM
Again, thete's nothing to take back, neither one is the face of the party yet. Your question is premature.

You're one opinion of many, I've heard different from others.

Cigar
01-31-2016, 10:03 PM
I don't know but Ferguson was a sham. The dead guy was the criminal not the cop.

Do you plan on changing the discussion from Conservatives to Ferguson Missouri?

Matty
01-31-2016, 10:07 PM
Do you plan on changing the discussion from Conservatives to Ferguson Missouri?


I suppose you wish to blame conservatives for Ferguson.

hanger4
01-31-2016, 10:07 PM
You're one opinion of many, I've heard different from others.

Then the 'others' are assuming. The primaries have yet to finish.

Cigar
01-31-2016, 10:08 PM
Then the 'others' are assuming. The primaries have yet to finish.

I don't look at the state of Iowa as being representative of any place but Iowa

Cigar
01-31-2016, 10:11 PM
I suppose you wish to blame conservatives for Ferguson.

Last Chance ... want to try to discuss the topic?

JVV
01-31-2016, 10:13 PM
So you joined the haters called democrats?

No.

hanger4
01-31-2016, 10:14 PM
I don't look at the state of Iowa as being representative of any place but Iowa

I have no idea where you're off to, but when the.primaries finish and the Repub candidate has been chosen then and only then will your question have any validity.

Cigar
01-31-2016, 10:14 PM
No.

For the record, many Liberals have thought the same about the Democrats for many Decades ...

Cigar
01-31-2016, 10:16 PM
I have no idea where you're off to, but when the.primaries finish and the Repub candidate has been chosen then and only then will your question have any validity.

Part of what you say is correct ...

Because I agree ... no matter who the Republican Candidate is, many will still Vote Republican ... same for Democrats.

Matty
01-31-2016, 10:20 PM
Do you believe the Republican Party, such as has been, can take back their Party from Trump and or Cruz?

Or do you believe Trump and or Cruz is the Future of the Party an this is the way it should evolve?


I believe anyone the Republicans put forth will be better than Obama or any democrat.

JVV
01-31-2016, 10:21 PM
I haven't joined with Democrats.

If Democrats nominate Sanders, then I'll consider the possibility that Democrats are for me.

But right now, since Democrats look like they're on the path to nominate Clinton, I don't have reason to trust Democrats. So I am without a party now.

Okay .... 'nuff about me ..... I'll leave the mic to the "Hi-Hard Life Long Conservatives" ........ :)

Dr. Who
01-31-2016, 10:25 PM
I have a couple of questions - why have so many conservatives deserted the GOP? Has their support traditionally stemmed from fiscal or social conservatism?

Dr. Who
01-31-2016, 10:26 PM
I haven't joined with Democrats.

If Democrats nominate Sanders, then I'll consider the possibility that Democrats are for me.

But right now, since Democrats look like they're on the path to nominate Clinton, I don't have reason to trust Democrats. So I am without a party now.

Okay .... 'nuff about me ..... I'll leave the mic to the "Hi-Hard Life Long Conservatives" ........ :)
When you supported the GOP, what were you supporting and how has it changed?

JVV
01-31-2016, 10:33 PM
When you supported the GOP, what were you supporting and how has it changed?


I said 'nuff about me!












(My goal was competent management and the avoidance of what I saw as impractical liberal plans. I thought of liberals as a necessary evil. Well, not evil, but not practical. I thought they were needed to help the country have heart, to remind Republicans about people who were slipping through the cracks, but I thought that Republicans were needed to help keep the country on a sane, manageable path. Only, now Republicans have abdicated the sane, manageable path and are letting the country fall into ruin. They don't care about infrastructure or helping veterans or sound immigration policy or sound science. Just stopping abortion and stopping gay marriage and other stupid stuff while our economy sinks in quicksand.)

Cletus
01-31-2016, 10:36 PM
I have a couple of questions - why have so many conservatives deserted the GOP? Has their support traditionally stemmed from fiscal or social conservatism?

The Republican Party has in many ways, become almost indistinguishable from the Democrat Party.

Matty
01-31-2016, 10:36 PM
I said 'nuff about me!












(My goal was competent management and the avoidance of what I saw as impractical liberal plans. I thought of liberals as a necessary evil. Well, not evil, but not practical. I thought they were needed to help the country have heart, to remind Republicans about people who were slipping through the cracks, but I thought that Republicans were needed to help keep the country on a sane, manageable path. Only, now Republicans have abdicated the sane, manageable path and are letting the country fall into ruin. They don't care about infrastructure or helping veterans or sound immigration policy or sound science. Just stopping abortion and stopping gay marriage and other stupid stuff while our economy sinks in quicksand.)





There are many untruths in your signature line.

Matty
01-31-2016, 10:38 PM
The Republican Party has in many ways, become almost indistinguishable from the Democrat Party.


So .much so that they have allowed the democrat known as Trump walk in and seal their fate

Dr. Who
01-31-2016, 10:41 PM
I said 'nuff about me!











(My goal was competent management and the avoidance of what I saw as impractical liberal plans. I thought of liberals as a necessary evil. Well, not evil, but not practical. I thought they were needed to help the country have heart, to remind Republicans about people who were slipping through the cracks, but I thought that Republicans were needed to help keep the country on a sane, manageable path. Only, now Republicans have abdicated the sane, manageable path and are letting the country fall into ruin. They don't care about infrastructure or helping veterans or sound immigration policy or sound science. Just stopping abortion and stopping gay marriage and other stupid stuff while our economy sinks in quicksand.)

So you were/are a fiscal conservative essentially.

JVV
01-31-2016, 10:42 PM
There are many untruths in your signature line.


I don't have a signature line.

Dr. Who
01-31-2016, 10:44 PM
The Republican Party has in many ways, become almost indistinguishable from the Democrat Party.
While I also believe that both parties are puppets of the same masters, is traditional GOP support fiscal or social or some combination of both?

JVV
01-31-2016, 10:47 PM
So you were/are a fiscal conservative essentially.


I don't know that that applies.

I was conservative in the sense of not wanting rapid change. I have an ingrained respect for the law of unintended consequences. I felt that liberals would always want too much. Give 'em an inch and they'd reel you out into deep, deep waters.

But now I'm backing Sanders. All the way. I don't think there's much conservative about me right now.

Our country is in trouble. We need to do something. And we need a trustworthy person leading the charge. I'll follow Sanders places that I wouldn't follow anyone else.

Subdermal
01-31-2016, 10:48 PM
I was at an Beer Tasting Event yesterday and had a conversation with a bunch of Republicans and they want just about anyone but Trump and Cruz.

Straight from the Tap

http://arrowheadgolfclub.org/beer/

'Country Club Republicans' is the moniker describing typical RINO GOP. My club has few of those. Most of my guys are Cruz or Trump, with a sprinkling of Rubio supporters.

Cletus
01-31-2016, 10:50 PM
While I also believe that both parties are puppets of the same masters, is traditional GOP support fiscal or social or some combination of both?

I am sure for most it is some of both. There are some people who are niche votes, but I suspect they are in the minority, although to certain extent, I probably fit into that category. There are some things that are very important to me and a lot of things I care very little about.

Boris The Animal
01-31-2016, 10:53 PM
I don't know that that applies.

I was conservative in the sense of not wanting rapid change. I have an ingrained respect for the law of unintended consequences. I felt that liberals would always want too much. Give 'em an inch and they'd reel you out into deep, deep waters.

But now I'm backing Sanders. All the way. I don't think there's much conservative about me right now.

Our country is in trouble. We need to do something. And we need a trustworthy person leading the charge. I'll follow Sanders places that I wouldn't follow anyone else.Right into Red Square in Moscow. Sanders is 100% Communist.

Captain Obvious
01-31-2016, 11:00 PM
Right into Red Square in Moscow. Sanders is 100% Communist.

I bet your neighbors are very nervous.

Boris The Animal
01-31-2016, 11:01 PM
I bet your neighbors are very nervous.
Why? Because I am one of the common sense Conservatives who don't want another ultra Leftist in the WH?

Captain Obvious
01-31-2016, 11:02 PM
Why? Because I am one of the common sense Conservatives who don't want another ultra Leftist in the WH?

No, because you're a babbling lunatic.

I hope the neighborhood kids are well informed.

Dr. Who
01-31-2016, 11:06 PM
I don't know that that applies.

I was conservative in the sense of not wanting rapid change. I have an ingrained respect for the law of unintended consequences. I felt that liberals would always want too much. Give 'em an inch and they'd reel you out into deep, deep waters.

But now I'm backing Sanders. All the way. I don't think there's much conservative about me right now.

Our country is in trouble. We need to do something. And we need a trustworthy person leading the charge. I'll follow Sanders places that I wouldn't follow anyone else.
Ah, I see. You are a classic conservative. I can see why you are in a quandary. There is no longer any party that represents those ideals or any ideals. Sanders is the only really idealistic candidate running for office. Everyone else is really a neocon or neolib, but nonetheless a servant of their financial benefactors.

Dr. Who
01-31-2016, 11:15 PM
Right into Red Square in Moscow. Sanders is 100% Communist.
Is the oligarch inherently more trustworthy than the communist?

Boris The Animal
01-31-2016, 11:28 PM
Is the oligarch inherently more trustworthy than the communist?Yup. Communism is a failure in every sense of the word. And the Leftists want more of it?

maineman
01-31-2016, 11:59 PM
boris is on record as acquiescing to the rich taking everything away from him.... just as long as they don't use the "c-word".

Cigar
02-01-2016, 08:01 AM
The Republican Party has in many ways, become almost indistinguishable from the Democrat Party.

With one huge exception ...

One Party wants to do something and the other doesn't want to do anything.
One Party sales hope and change and the other sales gloom and doom.
One party wants to go forward and the other wants to go backwards.
One party wants to be inclusive of all Americans and the other wants to exclude Americans.
One party Wins Elections when most of America Votes and the other Wins when most of America doesn't Vote.

JVV
02-01-2016, 12:31 PM
With one huge exception ...

One Party wants to do something and the other doesn't want to do anything.
One Party sales hope and change and the other sales gloom and doom.
One party wants to go forward and the other wants to go backwards.
One party wants to be inclusive of all Americans and the other wants to exclude Americans.
One party Wins Elections when most of America Votes and the other Wins when most of America doesn't Vote.


Democrats talk good talk.

However, they're winning elections not because of their performance but because Republicans do scary stuff like talk about "legitimate rape" and babies from rape being gifts from God.

Obama didn't win reelection because he did well. The recovery was lagging. He should have been a "one-term proposition" to use his words. But Republicans were stupid and pandered to the rightwing radio crowd and adopted talk radio's meme's and made themselves a joke.

And when they (edit: Democrats) get into office, they don't act democratically enough to convince people that they're worth voting for again, so their base is dispirited and stays home and the people voting against Democrats get their chance.

If Democrats nominate Clinton, that will be more of the same. Most people won't be voting for Hillary -- they'll be voting against Trump. The tug-of-war will continue. Democrats need to go all in for what they say they believe in -- and then the politicians who are elected need to make sure that they involve the people and don't do that "we're doing it for your own good and you'll like it when you understand it" crap.

Ransom
02-01-2016, 12:45 PM
Most 'Hi-Hard Life Long Conservatives' are far too left for my tastes. Course...I consider Attila the Hun a tad soft.

Cigar
02-01-2016, 12:48 PM
Democrats talk good talk.

However, they're winning elections not because of their performance but because Republicans do scary stuff like talk about "legitimate rape" and babies from rape being gifts from God.

Obama didn't win reelection because he did well. The recovery was lagging. He should have been a "one-term proposition" to use his words. But Republicans were stupid and pandered to the rightwing radio crowd and adopted talk radio's meme's and made themselves a joke.

And when they get into office, they don't act democratically enough to convince people that they're worth voting for again, so their base is dispirited and stays home and the people voting against Democrats get their chance.

If Democrats nominate Clinton, that will be more of the same. Most people won't be voting for Hillary -- they'll be voting against Trump. The tug-of-war will continue. Democrats need to go all in for what they say they believe in -- and then the politicians who are elected need to make sure that they involve the people and don't do that "we're doing it for your own good and you'll like it when you understand it" crap.

IfDems Win, they will still have to deal with Obstruction from the Right..

JVV
02-01-2016, 01:07 PM
IfDems Win, they will still have to deal with Obstruction from the Right..

If Dems acted democratically in 2009, the Tea Party would not have gained traction. Dems had an extraordinary mandate but they didn't act in a responsive manner to the concerns of the people, and they crafted law which both contradicted their campaign promises and left the people out of the process.

Instead in the spring of 2010, Obama was stuck with saying, "we get it, you're frustrated, you don't have jobs, we'll get right on that after we get this healthcare thing passed, which you'll appreciate it after you understand it even though you are very clearly terribly anxious about it now".

Democrats could have shown the people that (a) they trusted the people and (b) they were trustworthy. But they didn't. And they brought about their shellacking in 2010. Ted Kennedy's seat should have been so easy for Democrats to retain but they blew it so badly by not acting in a democratic manner. And instead of making the case to the people about the importance of the public option in a compelling manner -- which would have paved the path for Snowe, Collins, McCain, Graham, etc. to get on board with them -- they ditched the best parts of the law they were paternalistically insisting on doing and ended up with a version which was so fragile that it needed Democrats to be around in order to make sure that Republicans couldn't screw it up. But by creating such a bad law in the midst of public angst about jobs and mortgages, they lost their ability to manage the law. And lost their ability to do other things such as the immigration reform which Obama swore he would back during his first year in office.

Ooops. /end rant

Bottom line: Obama didn't act democratically. He didn't give the public reasons to trust Democrats. Democrats could have/should have been able to use Obama to make the case for so many good pieces of legislation and bring the public on board with it and they. didn't. try. hard. enough. They didn't trust the people. And the people reacted so understandably badly that not even Massachusetts was willing to play along and help Democrats keep their majorities.



So, there you have my former Republican point of view. Obama and the Democrats could have brought me on board if they had trusted the people enough to come and explain to us what the public option was and what the consequences of losing it would be. But, no, they got even cozier with insurance companies and patronized us and lied to us. I was a closet liberal waiting to find someone to trust with the government checkbook, and Democrats had a golden opportunity in 2009 and blew it.

So that's how Democrats and Republicans don't seem very different. Democrats have ideas. Coherent policy ideas. But they don't act democratically, and with the nomination of Hillary Clinton they're showing they're not really interested in change. Just in preserving the status quo and stopping Republicans from getting back in power.

And by playing it so "safe", with such an uninspiring candidate -- by going for just that one thing -- trying to keep the White House and stop Republicans from pulling SCOTUS to the right -- they could possibly lose that one thing.

Democrats need to really understand what they lost in 2009 and why they lost it. They need to BE democratic. They need to believe in their own talking points and believe in the people.



Ooops. I guess my rant wasn't over yet. Okay, it is now.

Cigar
02-01-2016, 01:42 PM
If Obama didn't get the ACA now, it would have never been done.

Millions of Americans who couldn't get Healthcare are grateful.

Those who could then and still can will b!tch because someone who they think is lowly is getting something ... but who cares?

Boris The Animal
02-01-2016, 02:01 PM
If Obama didn't get the ACA now, it would have never been done.

Millions of Americans who couldn't get Healthcare are grateful.

Those who could then and still can will b!tch because someone who they think is lowly is getting something ... but who cares?And yet you still have millions without health INSURANCE because of Obummercare. And there are those who are grabbing the ankles over the skyrocketing premiums and deductibles. Sorry, but the old way was better.

Cigar
02-01-2016, 02:02 PM
And yet yous till have millions without health INSURANCE because of Obummercare.

Don't worry, Bernie is on the way to fill that gap. :wink:

JVV
02-01-2016, 02:03 PM
If Obama didn't get the ACA now, it would have never been done.

Millions of Americans who couldn't get Healthcare are grateful.

Those who could then and still can will b!tch because someone who they think is lowly is getting something ... but who cares?



If Obama had acted in a democratic manner, he could have gotten a better version passed and still have retained his Democratic majorities in order to pass more good policy.

It is not Republicans' fault that Obama lied. It is not Republicans' fault that instead of explaining the importance of such things as the public option, Obama cut himself off from the people more and more.

The ACA was huge. It needed to at least have the majority of the people behind it. And if it had the majority of the people, the moderate GOP Senators would have had the cover they needed to join in on the vote. Obama didn't due do diligence. And Democrats lost the House. Then the Senate. Because Democrats didn't show they were any more trustworthy than Republicans.

Cigar
02-01-2016, 02:05 PM
If Obama had acted in a democratic manner, he could have gotten a better version passed and still have retained his Democratic majorities in order to pass more good policy.

It is not Republicans' fault that Obama lied. It is not Republicans' fault that instead of explaining the importance of such things as the public option, Obama cut himself off from the people more and more.

The ACA was huge. It needed to at least have the majority of the people behind it. And if it had the majority of the people, the moderate GOP Senators would have had the cover they needed to join in on the vote. Obama didn't due do diligence. And Democrats lost the House. Then the Senate. Because Democrats didn't show they were any more trustworthy than Republicans.

I don't think so ... and BTW, what is stopping anyone from improving on the ACA?

Why do you have to repeal it first?

Boris The Animal
02-01-2016, 02:06 PM
Don't worry, Bernie is on the way to fill that gap. :wink:Nope. Bernie will make Mondull's loss seem close. Nobody wants a Communist in the WH, except for race baiters like you.

JVV
02-01-2016, 02:07 PM
Republicans suck. But that's not an excuse for Democrats sucking too. Democrats had such a huge chance to do something good in 2009, something which would have let them keep their Congressional majorities ... and they didn't do it.

They just lucked out that the Tea Party decided to put up people like Angle and O'Donnell. That saved Harry Reid's bacon.

And that's what Democrats are going to be counting on this time around. They're choosing an ethically shaky candidate, but they're gonna count on people hating the Republicans' candidate enough to vote for her.

They're passing up a chance to have a passionate nominee who is committed to involving the people in the political process and then they're gonna spend the next four years acting sad and mad about how Clinton can't get Republicans to cooperate with her.

Cletus
02-01-2016, 02:07 PM
I don't think so ... and BTW, what is stopping anyone from improving on the ACA?

Why do you have to repeal it first?

Because it is a bad law.

Cigar
02-01-2016, 02:08 PM
Because it is a bad law.

I thought the Republicans did a good job with Romney-care :laugh:

JVV
02-01-2016, 02:13 PM
I don't think so ... and BTW, what is stopping anyone from improving on the ACA?

Why do you have to repeal it first?


Democrats stopped themselves from being able to improve the ACA. They stopped themselves from being able to keep Congress and stop Republicans from undermining the ACA.

Democrats need to get people on board with improving it. But so far they've acted quite stupidly about it. So worried about people finding out what was in it as late as 2013 that they couldn't even create a well-functioning computer interface.

Still seemingly worried about people finding out the rest of the stuff that's in it -- pushing the implementation of certain things from it until after the 2016 election.


Democrats are still being shady about the ACA. Still blaming Republicans instead of taking responsibility for what they did wrong. Why would Republicans want to step up and help while Democrats were still in "deflect blame to Rebublicans" mode?

Does Clinton have a plan to improve it?

Matty
02-01-2016, 02:13 PM
With one huge exception ...

One Party wants to do something and the other doesn't want to do anything.
One Party sales hope and change and the other sales gloom and doom.
One party wants to go forward and the other wants to go backwards.
One party wants to be inclusive of all Americans and the other wants to exclude Americans.
One party Wins Elections when most of America Votes and the other Wins when most of America doesn't Vote.


That's just hogwash.

Cletus
02-01-2016, 02:32 PM
I thought the Republicans did a good job with Romney-care :laugh:

Why do you talk so much when you know so little?

texan
02-01-2016, 02:34 PM
Do you believe the Republican Party, such as has been, can take back their Party from Trump and or Cruz?

Or do you believe Trump and or Cruz is the Future of the Party an this is the way it should evolve?

Why would they want to is my question back?


Can you take yours back from executive action and not actually governing? No BS excuses please.

lastly, will you be able to take your country back after the GOP wins with Trump or Cruz?

JVV
02-01-2016, 02:36 PM
I thought the Republicans did a good job with Romney-care :laugh:


Romneycare is an example of what was wrong with Obamacare.

Romneycare was showing weaknesses at the same time that Obama was pushing to make it the law of the land.

Doing 50 state experiments would have been one good approach, with Romneycare being one of the experiments.


But no matter what, Obama needed to get the people on board with the new law before he pushed something that big through Congress.

After Scott Brown's election, Obama showed signs of getting where he went wrong. He acknowledged that he had lost connection with the people.

ABC News' George Stephanopoulos' Exclusive Interview with President Obama - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/Politics/abc-news-george-stephanopoulos-exclusive-interview-president-obama/story?id=9611223)


And he said that Congress needed to listen to the people regarding that election and let Brown be part of the process, but Congress instead got even less democratic than they already were and chose their backdoor trick to get the bill to pass.


Democrats not being democratic. Not doing the hard work needed to engage the people and help the people feel ownership of the process and the law. Not doing the hard work to create good law.

It's very sad that Democrats chose that route.

But they did, and missed a golden opportunity, and the people are apathetic.


Sanders represents another golden opportunity to get people engaged in the process again and help them feel ownership of government and of Democratic accomplishments.

I hope we take that opportunity.


If not, then Democrats will have once again failed to sufficiently differentiate themselves from establishment Republicans. They'll keep being elected because they're not the crazy Republicans. But they'll keep giving power back to Republicans in alternate years because they don't practice what they preach.

Cigar
02-01-2016, 02:37 PM
That's just hogwash.

Which one is wrong?

Cigar
02-01-2016, 02:38 PM
Romneycare is an example of what was wrong with Obamacare.

Romneycare was showing weaknesses at the same time that Obama was pushing to make it the law of the land.

Doing 50 state experiments would have been one good approach, with Romneycare being one of the experiments.


But no matter what, Obama needed to get the people on board with the new law before he pushed something that big through Congress.

After Scott Brown's election, Obama showed signs of getting where he went wrong. He acknowledged that he had lost connection with the people.

ABC News' George Stephanopoulos' Exclusive Interview with President Obama - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/Politics/abc-news-george-stephanopoulos-exclusive-interview-president-obama/story?id=9611223)


And he said that Congress needed to listen to the people regarding that election and let Brown be part of the process, but Congress instead got even less democratic than they already were and chose their backdoor trick to get the bill to pass.


Democrats not being democratic. Not doing the hard work needed to engage the people and help the people feel ownership of the process and the law. Not doing the hard work to create good law.

It's very sad that Democrats chose that route.

But they did, and missed a golden opportunity, and the people are apathetic.


Sanders represents another golden opportunity to get people engaged in the process again and help them feel ownership of government and of Democratic accomplishments.

I hope we take that opportunity.


If not, then Democrats will have once again failed to sufficiently differentiate themselves from establishment Republicans. They'll keep being elected because they're not the crazy Republicans. But they'll keep giving power back to Republicans in alternate years because they don't practice what they preach.

How exactly has Obamacare Hurt you "personally"?

Other than hurt feelings?

JVV
02-01-2016, 02:43 PM
How exactly has Obamacare Hurt you "personally"?

Other than hurt feelings?


I can't take advantage of Obamacare. I fall under the family glitch. My family's insurance costs and deductibles are higher, and higher than 10% of our income. His personal premium's are less than 10% of his income as required by law but the family part of the insurance is very high and yet since my husband's employer offers family insurance I can't get the subsidies.

But my objection to Obamacare is truly the undemocratic way in which it was conceived.

Mock me about my hurt feelings all you want, but the fact is that Democrats did get shellacked in 2010. Republicans did not make them lie. Republicans did not make them behave in an undemocratic manner. Republicans did not earn back the Congress. Democrats lost it by not bringing people like me on board with what they were doing.

I credit Democrats with having good ideas. But instead of being willing to admit that something is missing in the execution, you get personal with me and talk about my hurt feelings.

That is a symptom of Democrats' problem, and if Democrats don't fix it, they're going to keep failing to show the public that government is worthy of trust.

MisterVeritis
02-01-2016, 02:45 PM
I have a couple of questions - why have so many conservatives deserted the GOP? Has their support traditionally stemmed from fiscal or social conservatism?
It's that whole "Constitution Thing" for me. Democrats have long subverted it. Republicans, the Establishment Republicans, do as well.

MisterVeritis
02-01-2016, 02:47 PM
I don't know that that applies.

I was conservative in the sense of not wanting rapid change. I have an ingrained respect for the law of unintended consequences. I felt that liberals would always want too much. Give 'em an inch and they'd reel you out into deep, deep waters.

But now I'm backing Sanders. All the way. I don't think there's much conservative about me right now.

Our country is in trouble. We need to do something. And we need a trustworthy person leading the charge. I'll follow Sanders places that I wouldn't follow anyone else.
Impressive. You went from conservative to Marxist in one small step.

Cigar
02-01-2016, 02:47 PM
I can't take advantage of Obamacare. I fall under the family glitch. My family's insurance costs and deductibles are higher, and higher than 10% of our income. His personal premium's are less than 10% of his income as required by law but the family part of the insurance is very high and yet since my husband's employer offers family insurance I can't get the subsidies.

But my objection to Obamacare is truly the undemocratic way in which it was conceived.

Mock me about my hurt feelings all you want, but the fact is that Democrats did get shellacked in 2010. Republicans did not make them lie. Republicans did not make them behave in an undemocratic manner. Republicans did not earn back the Congress. Democrats lost it by not bringing people like me on board with what they were doing.

I credit Democrats with having good ideas. But instead of being willing to admit that something is missing in the execution, you get personal with me and talk about my hurt feelings.

That is a symptom of Democrats' problem, and if Democrats don't fix it, they're going to keep failing to show the public that government is worthy of trust.

So you have options ... good for you.

Why would you not want your follow Americans to have options also?

Cletus
02-01-2016, 02:49 PM
It's that whole "Constitution Thing" for me.

It is distressing that so many can't figure that out.

JVV
02-01-2016, 03:01 PM
So you have options ... good for you.

Why would you not want your follow Americans to have options also?


Wow. I thought we were having a good conversation. And I know I made some good points. And you're jumping to meaningless, personal deflection.

I do want my fellow Americans to have options.

I want them to have good options.

In order to get there, I want the people with the ideas to practice what they preach in order to gain the trust of the people. And in order to gain the help of the people in getting toward those noble goals.

As it is, we don't have very many good options. The people with the ideas go to Washington and then cozy up to the corporatist lobbyists and don't keep the faith with the people. So the nation votes for gridlock.



I do want options.

It's not my fault Democrats passed up the chance to get people like me on board with them and do truly good things to get us closer to truly affordable healthcare and closer to truly universal healthcare.


I'm not the enemy, but keep treating me like I am and see how much that gets you.


If Democrats don't start "getting it", they can win this battle but they won't win the war. And the people won't win.



And by playing it so safe and choosing the corporatist chameleon instead of someone who can win the trust of the people, they could possibly even lose this battle. As inconceivable as it seems right now, Republicans could win the White House. Because Democrats didn't show that they really believed what they claimed to believe.

JVV
02-01-2016, 03:19 PM
Impressive. You went from conservative to Marxist in one small step.

I wasn't really conservative. I was a closet liberal who wasn't given reason to trust the government. But our infrastructure is crumbling and we need to invest in the country and I trust Sanders.

MisterVeritis
02-01-2016, 03:27 PM
I wasn't really conservative. I was a closet liberal who wasn't given reason to trust the government. But our infrastructure is crumbling and we need to invest in the country and I trust Sanders.
That was always my guess. Closet Marxists just have an air about them.
Plunder looks good to the thieves.

Cigar
02-01-2016, 03:30 PM
Wow. I thought we were having a good conversation. And I know I made some good points. And you're jumping to meaningless, personal deflection.

I do want my fellow Americans to have options.

I want them to have good options.

In order to get there, I want the people with the ideas to practice what they preach in order to gain the trust of the people. And in order to gain the help of the people in getting toward those noble goals.

As it is, we don't have very many good options. The people with the ideas go to Washington and then cozy up to the corporatist lobbyists and don't keep the faith with the people. So the nation votes for gridlock.



I do want options.

It's not my fault Democrats passed up the chance to get people like me on board with them and do truly good things to get us closer to truly affordable healthcare and closer to truly universal healthcare.


I'm not the enemy, but keep treating me like I am and see how much that gets you.


If Democrats don't start "getting it", they can win this battle but they won't win the war. And the people won't win.



And by playing it so safe and choosing the corporatist chameleon instead of someone who can win the trust of the people, they could possibly even lose this battle. As inconceivable as it seems right now, Republicans could win the White House. Because Democrats didn't show that they really believed what they claimed to believe.


No it's not a personal deflection or attack ... it's what is the personal impact to you compared to the less fortunate.

JVV
02-01-2016, 03:35 PM
No it's not a personal deflection or attack ... it's what is the personal impact to you compared to the less fortunate.


Millions still don't have insurance.

Millions who do have insurance can't or don't use the insurance they have because of prohibitive deductibles and general confusion. I have more expensive insurance and have put off getting medical care because of the deductibles.

I am pissed off that Democrats didn't do the work to better serve the unfortunate. They were lazy and they lied and they threw away the huge opportunity they had to show that government could be trustworthy.

And to this day many of them refuse to acknowledge what they did wrong and just blame Republicans and then hope that Republicans being so scary will get me to vote for their corporatist chameleon. Huge fail.

Cigar
02-01-2016, 03:38 PM
Millions still don't have insurance.

Millions who do have insurance can't or don't use the insurance they have because of prohibitive deductibles and general confusion.

I am pissed off that Democrats didn't do the work to better serve the unfortunate. They were lazy and they lied and they threw away the huge opportunity they had to show that government could be trustworthy.

And to this day many of them refuse to acknowledge what they did wrong and just blame Republicans and then hope that Republicans being so scary will get me to vote for their corporatist chameleon. Huge fail.

The ACA was never intended to eliminate insurance problems for every single human being in the United States ...

But you can Elect Bernie to do that, if that's what you're really trying to do?

Matty
02-01-2016, 03:38 PM
Millions still don't have insurance.

Millions who do have insurance can't or don't use the insurance they have because of prohibitive deductibles and general confusion. I have more expensive insurance and have put off getting medical care because of the deductibles.

I am pissed off that Democrats didn't do the work to better serve the unfortunate. They were lazy and they lied and they threw away the huge opportunity they had to show that government could be trustworthy.

And to this day many of them refuse to acknowledge what they did wrong and just blame Republicans and then hope that Republicans being so scary will get me to vote for their corporatist chameleon. Huge fail.


I think I'm starting to appreciate you.

Cigar
02-01-2016, 03:41 PM
So are you really concerned about the Millions remaining who don't have insurance?

Matty
02-01-2016, 03:41 PM
The ACA was never intended to eliminate insurance problems for every single human being in the United States ...

But you can Elect Bernie to do that, if that's what you're really trying to do?

Oh really? What was it intended to do then?

Cigar
02-01-2016, 03:43 PM
Oh really? What was it intended to do then?

Exactly what they said it would do ... help Millions and it did

JVV
02-01-2016, 03:45 PM
The ACA was never intended to eliminate insurance problems for every single human being in the United States ...

But you can Elect Bernie to do that, if that's what you're really trying to do?


The ACA could have been so much better if Democrats had behaved democratically and involved the people in the process.

I am voting for Sanders in the primary.

Even if Democrats choose Hillary as their nominee, I am still voting for Sanders in the general election. I will write him in.

My husband will vote for Trump if Hillary is the nominee. He doesn't like Trump and once claimed he would never vote for Trump no matter what, but he will if Hillary is the alternative. He won't join me in writing anyone in. He will be voting against Hillary.

Matty
02-01-2016, 03:47 PM
Exactly what they said it would do ... help Millions and it did


While it it hurt millions more, I don't think you should brag about that shit. The happy people are the people getting the freebies. Democrats never learn there is no such thing as free stuff. You are simply leeching it from someone else. You have demonstrably injured the middle class.

Cigar
02-01-2016, 03:50 PM
The ACA could have been so much better if Democrats had behaved democratically and involved the people in the process.

I am voting for Sanders in the primary.

Even if Democrats choose Hillary as their nominee, I am still voting for Sanders in the general election. I will write him in.

My husband will vote for Trump if Hillary is the nominee. He doesn't like Trump and once claimed he would never vote for Trump no matter what, but he will if Hillary is the alternative. He won't join me in writing anyone in. He will be voting against Hillary.

Sorry, The Republicans declared on Tuesday January 20th, 2009 at a Dinner to never work with the President.

GOP's Anti-Obama Campaign Started Night Of Inauguration

As President Barack Obama was celebrating his inauguration at various balls, top Republican lawmakers and strategists were conjuring up ways to submarine his presidency at a private dinner in Washington.

The event -- which provides a telling revelation for how quickly the post-election climate soured -- serves as the prologue of Robert Draper's much-discussed and heavily-reported new book, "Do Not Ask What Good We Do: Inside the U.S. House of Representatives."


According to Draper, the guest list that night (which was just over 15 people in total) included Republican Reps. Eric Cantor (Va.), Kevin McCarthy (Calif.), Paul Ryan (Wis.), Pete Sessions (Texas), Jeb Hensarling (Texas), Pete Hoekstra (Mich.) and Dan Lungren (Calif.), along with Republican Sens. Jim DeMint (S.C.), Jon Kyl (Ariz.), Tom Coburn (Okla.), John Ensign (Nev.) and Bob Corker (Tenn.). The non-lawmakers present included Newt Gingrich, several years removed from his presidential campaign, and Frank Luntz, the long-time Republican wordsmith. Notably absent were Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) -- who, Draper writes, had an acrimonious relationship with Luntz.


For several hours in the Caucus Room (a high-end D.C. establishment), the book says they plotted out ways to not just win back political power, but to also put the brakes on Obama's legislative platform.


"If you act like you're the minority, you're going to stay in the minority," Draper quotes McCarthy as saying. "We've gotta challenge them on every single bill and challenge them on every single campaign."


"You will remember this day," Draper reports Newt Gingrich as saying on the way out. "You’ll remember this as the day the seeds of 2012 were sown."


Draper's timeline is correct. On Jan. 21, 2009, Kyl aggressively questioned (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/economy-watch/2009/01/grassley_bank_nationalization.html) Geithner during his confirmation hearings. On Jan. 28, 2009, House GOP leadership held the line against (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/29/us/politics/29obama.html) the stimulus package (Senate GOP leadership would prove less successful in stopping defections).

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/25/robert-draper-anti-obama-campaign_n_1452899.html


Remember, What Goes Around, Comes Around :grin:

Cigar
02-01-2016, 03:52 PM
While it it hurt millions more, I don't think you should brag about that $#@!. The happy people are the people getting the freebies. Democrats never learn there is no such thing as free stuff. You are simply leeching it from someone else. You have demonstrably injured the middle class.

I notice there's NO Links to your Millions ... but there are Links to the Millions who now have Insurance.

birddog
02-01-2016, 03:54 PM
Exactly what they said it would do ... help Millions and it did

If you pay insurance for your employees, are you saving $2500 a family per year as Obama promised?

JVV
02-01-2016, 04:03 PM
Sorry, The Republicans declared on Tuesday January 20th, 2009 at a Dinner to never work with the President.

....


I know that Republicans were being obstructionist.

I also know that Mitch McConnell claimed during Obama's first term that if Republicans got the Senate back and if Obama was willing to behave in a Clintonian manner, Republicans would find a way to work with them. That proved to be moot because Republicans only got the House. People like Sharron Angle blocked their chance of getting the Senate.



But NOTHING that Republicans did justified the lies and undemocratic behavior of Democrats.

Democrats had such a vast majority that all they needed to was pull RINOs like Snowe, Collins, McCain and Graham into their ranks.

Nothing excuses Democrats from not behaving in a democratic manner and bringing the public on board with what they were trying to do.

Nothing excuses Democrats' paternalistic "we're doing this for your own good and you'd like it if you understood it" manner. That attitude is why they had to jettison the public option. And it's why Democrats' holdings in the Congress are down to levels not seen since the 1930's.


Republicans were decimated in 2009. Democrats were in the driver's seat. And they chose not to be responsive to the concerns of citizens. Schumer addressed that subject after Democrats' surprise losses in 2014. Bernie addresses the subject in every breath on the campaign trail.



But your excuse for Democrats lying and cutting people out of the process was that decimated, demoralized Republicans had a pow-wow to strategize about how they might be able to stay relevant in spite of their great losses.

You don't get it.

And sadly too many Democrats don't get it. And that's why they aren't getting people like me on board with them to help achieve the things they claim to want.

Cigar
02-01-2016, 04:12 PM
I know that Republicans were being obstructionist.

I also know that Mitch McConnell claimed during Obama's first term that if Republicans got the Senate back and if Obama was willing to behave in a Clintonian manner, Republicans would find a way to work with them. That proved to be moot because Republicans only got the House. People like Sharron Angle blocked their chance of getting the Senate.



But NOTHING that Republicans did justified the lies and undemocratic behavior of Democrats.

Democrats had such a vast majority that all they needed to was pull RINOs like Snowe, Collins, McCain and Graham into their ranks.

Nothing excuses Democrats from not behaving in a democratic manner and bringing the public on board with what they were trying to do.

Nothing excuses Democrats' paternalistic "we're doing this for your own good and you'd like it if you understood it" manner. That attitude is why they had to jettison the public option. And it's why Democrats' holdings in the Congress are down to levels not seen since the 1930's.


Republicans were decimated in 2009. Democrats were in the driver's seat. And they chose not to be responsive to the concerns of citizens. Schumer addressed that subject after Democrats' surprise losses in 2014. Bernie addresses the subject in every breath on the campaign trail.



But your excuse for Democrats lying and cutting people out of the process was that decimated, demoralized Republicans had a pow-wow to strategize about how they might be able to stay relevant in spite of their great losses.

You don't get it.

And sadly too many Democrats don't get it. And that's why they aren't getting people like me on board with them to help achieve the things they claim to want.

So why did the always decline meetings?

Look we all know The Public Disrespect and out right disrespect this President received ... and we both know why.

So I'm gland he stuck right back into their face.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v358/AlexClarke/JOE_WILSON_YOU_LIE.jpg

http://www.urantiansojourn.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/YouLie.jpg

JVV
02-01-2016, 04:19 PM
Yeah, yeah, keep being glad that Obama stuck it in the face of the Republicans. Fat lot of good that did/does Democrats or the people whom Democrats could have helped.

Obama needed to take his case to the people. He didn't.

And then he lied and dismissed their concerns.



People wanted to love Obama. He had so much potential. And he let us down.


Done here.



#FeelTheBern

Cigar
02-01-2016, 04:22 PM
Yeah, yeah, keep being glad that Obama stuck it in the face of the Republicans. Fat lot of good that did/does Democrats or the people whom Democrats could have helped.

Obama needed to take his case to the people. He didn't.

And then he lied and dismissed their concerns.



People wanted to love Obama. He had so much potential. And he let us down.


Done here.



#FeelTheBern


I'm happy, isn't that what counts :laugh:

I remember losing Elections, and the world didn't end.

Mac-7
02-01-2016, 05:15 PM
I notice there's NO Links to your Millions ... but there are Links to the Millions who now have Insurance.

Its a simple thing for government to give free stuff like health insurance to some people.

but they have to take the money from someone else first and thats not good

Tahuyaman
02-01-2016, 05:38 PM
That's a funny question, since it was the conservatives who took the party away from the moderate progressives who founded the party and ran it for 100 years.

Conservatives are johnny-come-latelies to the GOP.


Where did you come up with that fairy tale?

Peter1469
02-01-2016, 05:40 PM
I thought the Republicans did a good job with Romney-care :laugh:

Not to support Romney care, but does the word Federalism mean anything to you?

Tahuyaman
02-01-2016, 05:41 PM
So why did the always decline meetings?

Look we all know The Public Disrespect and out right disrespect this President received ... and we both know why.

So I'm gland he stuck right back into their face.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v358/AlexClarke/JOE_WILSON_YOU_LIE.jpg

http://www.urantiansojourn.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/YouLie.jpg


Yes, it was disrespectful to shout out to the president. He shpuld have done what the Supreme Court justice did. Just shake his head in disagreement.

MisterVeritis
02-01-2016, 05:43 PM
I remember losing Elections, and the world didn't end.
Perhaps the world didn't end because the correct party won.

JVV
02-01-2016, 05:55 PM
That's a funny question, since it was the conservatives who took the party away from the moderate progressives who founded the party and ran it for 100 years.

Conservatives are johnny-come-latelies to the GOP.


Where did you come up with that fairy tale?


From Lincoln to Nixon, Republican presidents were progressive.

Reagan gave traction to a shift toward conservatism, and yet even he would be moderate by today's GOP standards.

Tahuyaman
02-01-2016, 06:03 PM
From Lincoln to Nixon, Republican presidents were progressive.

Reagan gave traction to a shift toward conservatism, and yet even he would be moderate by today's GOP standards.


Nonsense.

JVV
02-01-2016, 06:20 PM
Nonsense.


LOL. No.

Nixon was too liberal to even get the Democratic nod these days.

You saying "nonsense" doesn't change the progressive history of the GOP for most of its existence.

Republicans used to support infrastructure, organized labor, science, nationalization of public lands and utilities, etc.

Tahuyaman
02-01-2016, 06:23 PM
Hilarious

Nutz
02-01-2016, 06:44 PM
Do you believe the Republican Party, such as has been, can take back their Party from Trump and or Cruz?

Or do you believe Trump and or Cruz is the Future of the Party an this is the way it should evolve?

Now way...the self victimization, vitriol and fecklessness of teaperism is gonna give true conservatism a re-birth.

kilgram
02-01-2016, 07:04 PM
I don't know that that applies.

I was conservative in the sense of not wanting rapid change. I have an ingrained respect for the law of unintended consequences. I felt that liberals would always want too much. Give 'em an inch and they'd reel you out into deep, deep waters.

But now I'm backing Sanders. All the way. I don't think there's much conservative about me right now.

Our country is in trouble. We need to do something. And we need a trustworthy person leading the charge. I'll follow Sanders places that I wouldn't follow anyone else.
Conservative - rapid change?

If conservative is anything except change. For something is conservative.

Enviat des del meu Aquaris E5 usant Tapatalk

Tahuyaman
02-01-2016, 07:30 PM
Question for The Hi-Hard Life Long Conservatives

What's a "Hi-Hard" conservative?

Peter1469
02-01-2016, 07:48 PM
Conservative - rapid change?

If conservative is anything except change. For something is conservative.

Enviat des del meu Aquaris E5 usant Tapatalk

Not in America. Liberals highjacked government and conservatives want to change it back.

JVV
02-01-2016, 08:04 PM
Conservative - rapid change?

If conservative is anything except change. For something is conservative.

Enviat des del meu Aquaris E5 usant Tapatalk


I have no idea what you're asking/saying. Not sure it relates to what I said.

Bottom line: I am not a Conservative. Have never been a Conservative. I was a Republican.

I have preferred slow change rather than quick change. I rarely see cause to celebrate change for the sake of change. That's like celebrating growing an extra toe.

Even now when I think this country needs dramatic change, I don't want it to be just any change. I do want it to be in the direction of more investment in rebuilding the country. Also toward inclusivity, not away.

JVV
02-01-2016, 08:13 PM
Do you believe the Republican Party, such as has been, can take back their Party from Trump and or Cruz?

Or do you believe Trump and or Cruz is the Future of the Party an this is the way it should evolve?


Sorry ... has this question been answered by some actual Conservatives?

Or did I derail it by pointing out that Conservatives haven't owned the GOP for very long? :)




I will yield the floor now to some actual Conservatives. So no more questions for me! :D